Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36286065›Full record

ArticleClinics and practice2022

Decision-Making Capacity to Refuse Treatment at the End of Life: The Need for Recognizing Real-World Practices.

Akira Akabayashi, Eisuke Nakazawa, Hiroyasu Ino

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinics and practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Akira AkabayashiDepartment of Biomedical Ethics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-0811-1955
Eisuke NakazawaDepartment of Biomedical Ethics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan.
Hiroyasu InoDepartment of Biomedical Ethics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-5561-0111

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

End-of-life decision making is a troublesome ethical dilemma. These decisions should be made in trustful patient-doctor relationships. We aimed to propose a balanced approach when discussing this complex issue. We categorized the research into four approaches and suggest that a multidisciplinary approach may be appropriate. We also analyzed the pitfalls of the multidisciplinary approach. Our conclusion is two-fold. First, discussions in this field should be based on real-world practice. If this is not the case, the proposal may be armchair theory, which is not effective in a clinical setting. Second, interdisciplinary researchers should not stick to their position too firmly and should listen to others. Otherwise, proposals made will be paternalistic or philosophically biased. Therefore, when philosophical collaboration is applied to the topic of clinical bioethics, it is necessary to thoroughly examine different positions and carry out careful discussions with consideration for medical care settings. Researchers must also understand what is needed for a trustful patient-doctor relationship. By making such efforts, clinical bioethics will contribute to the wellbeing of patients.

Indexed as

clinical ethicsdecision-making capacityend of lifepatient–doctor relationshiptrust

Identifiers

PMID36286065
PMCPMC9600193

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.